site banner
PaperclipPerfector  1yr ago (text post)   40241 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of July 15, 2024

This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.

Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.

We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:

  • Shaming.

  • Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.

  • Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.

  • Recruiting for a cause.

  • Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.

In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:

  • Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.

  • Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.

  • Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.

  • Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.

On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.

9
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

In spite of book like 'Weapons of Math Destruction', books like Criminal (In)Justice still get published. The former presents plausible arguments for algorithmic bias, the other presents data about who commits crime and where. Black crime has been a supposedly awkward talking point since the 1970's. Jesse Jackson's comments marked a turning point in political honesty, but Sowell was happily publishing Black Rednecks and White Liberals not long after (which I found quite convincing). All of this stuff can and has been said. It's not some secret knowledge.

You (and others) have said this, that there's nothing new, everyone knows how this works, etc. Matt Yglesias didn't seem to know that. It's "wild" to him. Perhaps it is likewise "wild" to many others.

Just posting "despite..." in the right context is a meme. Yglesias said "This precrime paper is kind of wild". Thinking this implies he had no idea about the demographics of crime is kind of wild. Google trends seems to indicate that since 2004 "black on black crime" is about a common a trend as the highly secret sport of "pingpong". Just searching "black crime", it's about a common as searching for "Ethiopian food". (Random aside: I like spicy indian food, and Ethiopian food is like a cousin, which I also like. They frequently offer a spiced raw beef dish (kitfo). Veggies are good, sometimes too oily. All dishes pair well with beer).

Thinking this implies he had no idea about the demographics of crime is kind of wild.

Let's walk through this, then. What do you think his tweet does imply?

Its wild that an algorithm can predict crime before it happens.

...and why would one say that it is wild?

Because it a SciFi concept come to life

Now I'm just very confused. I thought this was all just old hat, been done before, obviously out there for anyone who cares to see. Now it's a SciFi concept come to life. I have no idea anymore...

Indeed there are multiple things to track: the technology (precrime by ML) and the demographics which, according to you, "cannot be said". I commented exclusively on the latter - pointing out that it's a common enough topic of discourse to be memeified and reliably the subject of entire books.

More comments

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats